Winning states in primaries does not translate to winning them in November. If that were the case, Bill Clinton would have lost NH, MD, CT, and CO and Reagan would have lost PA in 1980. And Obama has won more swing states and blue states than Clinton.

You keep forgetting that MI gave Obama 0 votes, and Hillary was the *ONLY* one in the ballot. DNC sanctioned Michigan and Florida for moving up their primaries when their Hillary-supporting legislators decided to ignore the agreed-upon rules and passed the new date that violated the early state rules. Only IA, NH, NV and SC were allowed to compete before Feb 5th. Michigan would have voted on Feb 5th if they agreed to the rules, and FL last week (with MS and WY) which would have been very relevant, but since they fucked up, they are now irrelevant, and may *be* relevant again in June when MI does their redo (but everyone has to agree on the redo - including Justice Dept). FL is dead in the water, and will be because their legislature is so fucked up, they couldn't even agree to do a re-do when Dean offered it. Dean is not even to blame either. Harold Ickes (who is a Clinton supporter) actually voted to sanction both MI and FL, so your argument hold no water.

comparing Clinton to Huckabee. Those numbers certainly don't add up. The Dem will win in November regardless of the candidate. Besides, Obama may have to drop out if he can't stand the heat. Whats the next "Reverend Wright" to drop?

I CARE about democracy. Its the veteran thing in me. I'm having a hard time on the 15th of March understanding how Obama has an insurmountable lead. Wishful thinking and talking point forwarding by his cult?

By the Way (Thats BTW in computer speak) I am and always have been a General Clark supporter. Lordy wouldn't a brokered convention be great with a bonafide hero nominated by the Dems.

and she would have to win every contest including the remaining super delegates by 20 points to pull it off. She likley wonm;t even win PA by 20 pts, much less any of the others, except maybe WV.

Until someone articulates with a clear and realistic scenario on extactly how she makes up the delegate count, I'm goig to have to agree that she has only an unclear and unrealistic chance of getting the nomination.

and is now irrelevant. Sorry, your bona-fide hero is no longer a hero, but the enemy, at least until Hillary drops out. I still respect your 24 years in service, and defending democracy, but Hillary is shitting on it and I'm quite puzzled on why you would support her?

WASHINGTON (AP)  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says it would be damaging to the Democratic party for its leaders to buck the will of national convention delegates picked in primaries and caucuses, a declaration that gives a boost to Sen. Barack Obama.

"If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what's happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic party," Pelosi said in an interview taped Friday for broadcast Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

The California Democrat did not mention either Obama or his rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, by name. But her remarks seemed to suggest she was prepared to cast her ballot at the convention in favor of the candidate who emerges from the primary season with the most pledged delegates.

Barring an unlikely string of landslide victories by the former first lady in the remaining states, he will end the primary season with a delegate lead, but short of the 2025 needed to win the nomination.

"...what's happened in the elections..." is two things, there have been delegates elected, and there has been a popular vote. Sounds like Pelosi is trying to say something that can be used to go either way.

This party's in trouble if Hillary ever does catch up in the popular vote total. And your math higher up this thread shows that it's quite possible for that to happen.

How could this happen? How could the Democrats assemble two breakthrough contenders with luminous, inspiring resumes for an election in which they were prohibitive favorites, and by March be on the verge of bungling it so badly that at least five important political groups could be alienated from the Democrats for a generation? Nice job.

<snip>

A month ago, on Feb. 13, Mark Penn, the chief strategist for the Clinton campaign, wrote a memo saying that the nomination would be decided by delegate count, not by momentum. "Again and again," he wrote, "this race has shown that it is voters and delegates who matter, not the pundits or perceived 'momentum.'" That was February. You don't hear the Clintonistas arguing that in March.

That's how much the race has changed. And it keeps changing. The Penn memo isn't evidence of the perfidy of the Clinton campaign. It's merely evidence that in this campaign, the two sides are going to keep fighting, changing their arguments, doing anything they can to come out on top by Labor Day.

Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, isn't known for contemplative thinking, but he captured the difficulty the Democrats face when he said the other day that the goal was to find a solution that would allow the losing campaign to feel it had been treated fairly. Good phrase. Good luck with that.

Because whatever happens, someone is going to be really, really upset, and every time that happens the party is affected, and punished, long beyond Election Day.

Remember, for example, how the Democrats alienated party regulars when they nominated George S. McGovern at a 1972 convention stocked with wildly disproportionate numbers of delegates carrying graduate degrees, or how the Republicans expelled their liberals and moderates at the Barry Goldwater convention in 1964?

Super delegates won't be able to ignore the drumbeat of public opinion caused by Rev. Wright's "perceived" hate speech. Couple that with the possible damaging revelations that will arise from the ongoing Rezko trial.

they are going to choose the best candidate to win in november, and the candidate who can win the states that are needed to get the 270 electoral votes. i also think that all those red states obama had hoped to convert to blue this november are now no longer a reality ....wright probably screwed that up for him anyway.

It is impossible to close a 150+ lead with the remaining contests. Even if it closes to 100, which is highly unlikely, she'd still have to win a ridiculous majority of the remaining super delegates wihthout a convincing argument to do so.

31. NY Times has been polling superdelegates, here is the latest and it looks bad for Hillary

For Democrats, Increased Fears of a Long Fight

By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JEFF ZELENYPublished: March 16, 2008

If we get to the end and Senator Obama has won more states, has more delegates and more popular vote, said Representative Jason Altmire, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who is undecided, I would need some sort of rationale for why at that point any superdelegate would go the other way, seeing that the people have spoken.

Mr. Altmire said he was repeating an argument that he made to Mrs. Clinton during a session at her house in Washington on Thursday night with uncommitted superdelegates.

The interviews were conducted at a time of rising displays of animosity between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, with Mrs. Clinton repeatedly arguing that Mr. Obama did not have the foreign policy credentials to stand up to Senator John McCain of Arizona, the likely Republican nominee. Several superdelegates said they were concerned that this could hurt the Democratic Party in the fall elections and put pressure on some of them to endorse one of the candidates to bring the contest to a quicker conclusion.

It would be nice to find a way to wrap it up, said Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who has not committed to either candidate. If the current trajectory of the debate continues, the divisions will make it more difficult for many of our candidates.

You have no idea what will happen if there is a Florida redo. Hillary might win by a wider margin that in the original contest, with increasing polarization of the vote and the scandals damaging Obama.

You have no idea how wide Hillary's margin will be in PA, if she is going to win a MI redo, or how much her margin will be in IN, KY, WV, or Puerto Rico.

You have no idea whether delegates currently committed to Obama might withdraw that commitment if the Wright business continues to intensify rather than disappear.

I have done the math for all of the remaining primaries, filling in realistic (though admittedly best case) estimates based on the best projections available for each state. It is not unreasonable for Clinton to close to within 30-40 pledged delegates, even without dramatic changes due to new scandals or a major turn in public opinion. It is not unreasonable that Clinton could win the popular vote. If she wins all of the big states except IL, wins the popular vote, and trails by just 30-40 pledged delegates, the roughly 300 uncommitted superdelegates at the convention would have enough justification to give her the nomination if they are so inclined.

Add in some major turn in momentum and Clinton could still win more pledged delegates than Obama. It is unlikely and impossible without a major shift in public opinion, but it is clearly possible.

80. Hillary could have gone out on a high note after the "I'm proud to be here with Senator Obama" scene

and found herself as VP choice with everyone rallying around the presumptive ticket, and love and kisses everywhere. Instead, she chose to poison the entire process and gotten everyone mad at each other. No wonder Hillary is the great polarizer, she has succeeded in pushing McCain's poll numbers higher than those of either of the remaining Democratic candidates.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.